[HN Gopher] Git log is not a changelog
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Git log is not a changelog
        
       Author : agateau
       Score  : 21 points
       Date   : 2022-07-16 21:12 UTC (1 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (agateau.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (agateau.com)
        
       | mulle_nat wrote:
       | I use the git log to feed my changelog. I prefix the stuff that's
       | supposed to go in the release notes with a asterix and the
       | technical boring stuff is just a normal line. Then at release
       | time I have a script that pulls the asterix prefixed lines from
       | the change log into the RELEASENOTES.md. I wouldn't want to
       | bother with more.
        
         | kreeben wrote:
         | How do you know that your asterixed commit should go into the
         | release notes? What if...
         | 
         | * fixed thing X so that user can do Y
         | 
         | broke things so that another commit is needed:
         | 
         | * fixed X again, so that user can finally do Y (for realz this
         | time)
         | 
         | This would not make a great release note.
        
           | ehPReth wrote:
           | you just wouldn't put a * in front of the second one
        
       | sss111 wrote:
       | use https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/, it has
       | extensions that can autogenerate a nice looking changelog.
        
         | jasonpeacock wrote:
         | Yep, something like Git Cliff[1] is great for generating
         | release notes from your commit messages.
         | 
         | And conventional commits are good thing to do regardless of
         | whether you use them for release notes or not. Commit messages
         | should be helpful and immediately obvious, too often its "fixed
         | bug" or "finally figured out foo!", which really tell you
         | nothing - might as well not have a message.
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/orhun/git-cliff
        
       | foxhop wrote:
       | no changelog until somebody complains?
        
       | _ph_ wrote:
       | Yes, a commit log isn't a changelog. However, a good commit log
       | can make writing your change log much easier. While this isn't an
       | automatic process, writing a changelog becomes a bit of filtering
       | of the commit messages as well as rephrasing them for the
       | intended audience.
        
       | cperciva wrote:
       | FreeBSD uses                   Relnotes: yes, or text for the
       | release notes
       | 
       | in commit messages to note that the commit has significant user-
       | visible effects.
        
       | lhnz wrote:
       | I think commits should contain atomic-yet-meaningful changes and
       | the commit message should describe this as well as possible.
       | 
       | It's worth rewriting the history to achieve this and squashing or
       | splitting commits until this is the case. You shouldn't do this
       | for the benefit of your users or a changelog, you should do this
       | in order that it is easier to bisect the history or for other
       | contributors to understand exactly the change a commit relates
       | to. There is nothing worse than commits which combine a working
       | bug fix with a half-written feature -- split them out!
       | 
       | Obviously, it's possible to inadvertently create a misleading
       | history by re-arranging the order that work was done or getting
       | rid of failed attempts at a solution, but generally the false
       | reality is easier to understand and good understanding is key.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-16 23:00 UTC)